3 questions for atheists
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 8 Votes - 1.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-01-2014, 05:39 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(23-01-2014 08:11 AM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  
(23-01-2014 02:27 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  Is that your version of addressing a question? Bless. Hobo

Do you have to be coherent at work, or in life, or does just consist of yelling "hungry" at your mum?


Hey. Pussy wannabe internet stalker rentboi. Don't ever PM me again. This is your only warning.

Given your warning of not PMing you again, i will PM you again. Is that what you were after?

"Unleash the memes"!! Hobo Hobo
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2014, 05:44 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(23-01-2014 11:29 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Please stop making assertions or there's no reason to think you are honest in wanting to understand or make a point. Again... lack of evidence doesn't assume evidence is knowable. It's irrelevant in the point if evidence is knowable, unknown, or not knowable. It's a point on it's own separate from whether or not things are known.

Of course a lack of evidence doesn't assume evidence is knowable, your dependence on evidence (or there lack of) is the assumption. If you have no position towards if evidence is knowable, then why do you confirm that the lack of evidence as if it's meaningful, or sufficient justification for your position?

The fundamental point which you seem to have difficulty grasping or addressing is that, assessing evidence assumes the necessary senses and ability to answer this question through potential analysis and observation. Given your dependence on evidence, I would expect that you can provide evidence to justify why you depend on evidence to answer this question. Is there a remote inkling you have which evidence is relevant and which is not? Personally I have no belief that either theists or atheist have ever addressed this question to a sufficient level. Perhaps, the singularity, quantum indeterminacy, evolution have given you sufficient grounds to make you feel justified in your approach towards obtaining evidence as a basis for addressing existence, personally these have done nothing for me as I was never a theist. So evolution did nothing to discount my views.

Quote:I gave you a reason and an example of why philosophically there's a distinction between believe and knowledge well over a week ago. It was one of my first posts in this thread. You scoffed it off. Didn't give a logical retort, just dismissed it. And there is multiple philological arguments upon what knowledge and belief are. Asserting one is more accurate over the other would lead to more worthless label discussion.

Link to the the example. I will respond.
Quote:Why are you answering questions, repeatedly, that you've ignored about yourself? Others and I asked several questions about your agnostic position and you ignored them giving questions as responses. If you care about being intellectually honest, answer questions to how you came to your conclusion.

Do you mean why I am asking question that I've ignored about myself? I will answer genuine questions asked of me, so I must have missed these.

Quote:So far you've given 1 reason I saw. You repeated it many times, but it's not substantiated that we are a product of a system we can't know it's origin. That's an assertion if it's not backed up with any examples of ways that takes hold.

If you provide any example of where an observer was able to obverse or analyse outside of its system, or a system that the total sum of the parts equals the whole I would be convinced. You fail to address that this is a very safe assumption to make without evidence otherwise. You seem to think, by not dismissing it, that's it's perfectly sound to assume that we can. This is as much of a leap as believing that an perfect god exists. On what basis do you not dismiss that a byproduct cannot assess the origin of the system that created it, the same basis which does not dismiss fairies?

Quote:Maybe you should just answer those 3 initial questions in relation to agnosticism. Though question 2 is flawed as I've mentioned before, it presumes a purpose but since I see you asking that question about atheism still, I guess that bit didn't click with you. There isn't an inherent purpose if you haven't figured it out.

Sure, although I don't think this will provide any different insight into my position.

1. Why do you have an active lack of belief? The position comes across as one who wants to be recognised as one who negates any form of god but not have to prove anything.

I don't focus on my lack of belief, or use it as a conclusion. I identify with what I assert, not with what I dismiss.

2. What is the purpose of atheism?
To show that theism is incorrect and a false conclusion to reach, it's a response to theism and does not exist by itself.

3. Why believe evidence is (or will be) available to confirm or negate a god?
I don't hence my agnosticism. I have no belief or use in evidence to address this question. If some evidence is obtained which proves me wrong, I will change my position. If a god exists I see no reason to assume it would be be able to be observed by us. To not dismiss this notion, would at least require a point of reference, or previous occurrence of this. Otherwise your version of scepticism verges on pointless as you wouldn't dismiss anything.


If there's no purpose why identify as it? That makes no sense whatsoever.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2014, 05:49 PM (This post was last modified: 23-01-2014 05:55 PM by Brownshirt.)
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(23-01-2014 05:10 PM)Adrianime Wrote:  Everytime I see brownshirt try to explain his stance it goes like this:

How I feel is: *puts out the definition of agnostic atheism*.
But the atheistic stance is not rational because: *puts out incorrect definition of atheism*.
So instead I take the rational position of agnosticism: *puts out incorrect definition of agnosticism*.
Agnostic atheism makes no sense because: *puts out incorrect definition of atheism* and *puts out incorrect definition of agnosticism*.
Thus, you guys are all wrong, and I am right.

Every time I see one of your posts I think, oh no he's tried to think again.

What sort of post is this? Do you want me to say "No my definitions are correct"?

You clearly struggle to understand what agnosticism is, and a purpose for your atheism, Be my guest, rationalise your perspective by saying you're right. If that's all you have, then atheism will hardly attract any form of people who have considered their perspective beyond a petulant child yelling "no". It's a slippery slope if you can't justify it. Then of course, you feel you don't need to.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2014, 05:54 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(23-01-2014 05:28 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(23-01-2014 05:10 PM)Adrianime Wrote:  Everytime I see brownshirt ...

Everytime I see his username all I can think of is that one time when ManlyGirl hollered at me from the laundry room, "Bob, how the fuck did you manage to get shit on your shirt?" ... Can't help it. ... (Okay, maybe it was technically more than one time.)

[Image: platters%20hire.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2014, 05:55 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(23-01-2014 03:52 AM)Dom Wrote:  Maybe time to look at why you are here and not in a civil section of the board?

I'm here because I choose to be. I joined this thread after it was moved here. I'm also making contemporaneous posts on the "civil section of the board" so your fundamental assumption is without basis.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2014, 06:05 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(23-01-2014 08:35 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(23-01-2014 12:19 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  Is that Chas in his formative years?

You and Chippy can go fuck yourselves. I have nothing to do with what Taq posts.

You neutral repped Tourettes so that is a tacit endorsement of its idiotic posting behaviour. He who lies with dogs...
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2014, 06:06 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(23-01-2014 08:11 AM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  
(23-01-2014 02:27 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  Is that your version of addressing a question? Bless. Hobo

Do you have to be coherent at work, or in life, or does just consist of yelling "hungry" at your mum?


Hey. Pussy wannabe internet stalker rentboi. Don't ever PM me again. This is your only warning.

This seems appropriate, I will speak memish to you.

[Image: funny-geek-security-rappers-level-70-paladin-pics.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Brownshirt's post
23-01-2014, 06:08 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(23-01-2014 05:55 PM)Chippy Wrote:  
(23-01-2014 03:52 AM)Dom Wrote:  Maybe time to look at why you are here and not in a civil section of the board?

I'm here because I choose to be. I joined this thread after it was moved here. I'm also making contemporaneous posts on the "civil section of the board" so your fundamental assumption is without basis.

That is not "my fundamental assumption". I do see you in melee and the pit a lot though, and then you complain about how people behave there. Maybe you are not aware what these sections are for? I also haven't been following your posts and actions, I just happen upon them periodically. I have no idea where all you do post.

My observation is that, when set off by whatever triggers you, you behave like a dick. And that is a huge contrast to your rational self. It doesn't fit. It doesn't belong with a person who is as intelligent as you are. It makes no sense. Hence, you make no sense. I see a person I can respect on many levels - who suddenly displays this huge flaw. Something is very wrong there. And I wonder if you are even aware. Are you?

Most often, people who act like you do so because they need it as a crutch. But you need no such crutch. So - why?

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dom's post
23-01-2014, 06:16 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(23-01-2014 06:06 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  
(23-01-2014 08:11 AM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  Hey. Pussy wannabe internet stalker rentboi. Don't ever PM me again. This is your only warning.

This seems appropriate, I will speak memish to you.

[Image: funny-geek-security-rappers-level-70-paladin-pics.jpg]

Yes the tough talking is utterly bizarre. Tourettes seems to think it is playing some sort of RPG where it does damage to you every time it posts a "meme". I think it expects you to respond in kind and thus have some sort of retard "meme battle". Tourettes declares victory and valour because it posted its best "memes", i.e. it used its level 70 Paladin spells on you.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chippy's post
23-01-2014, 06:22 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(23-01-2014 06:08 PM)Dom Wrote:  
(23-01-2014 05:55 PM)Chippy Wrote:  I'm here because I choose to be. I joined this thread after it was moved here. I'm also making contemporaneous posts on the "civil section of the board" so your fundamental assumption is without basis.

That is not "my fundamental assumption". I do see you in melee and the pit a lot though, and then you complain about how people behave there. Maybe you are not aware what these sections are for? I also haven't been following your posts and actions, I just happen upon them periodically. I have no idea where all you do post.

My observation is that, when set off by whatever triggers you, you behave like a dick. And that is a huge contrast to your rational self. It doesn't fit. It doesn't belong with a person who is as intelligent as you are. It makes no sense. Hence, you make no sense. I see a person I can respect on many levels - who suddenly displays this huge flaw. Something is very wrong there. And I wonder if you are even aware. Are you?

Most often, people who act like you do so because they need it as a crutch. But you need no such crutch. So - why?
That is an incredibly naive post on so many levels. I must admit I'm quite impressed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: